Kevin, there’s something about your article that suggests you don’t like our dear PM very much!! ( :>/

So what’s the answer to Labor’s woes?

Presumably you think that there is no chance of her mending her evil ways. And you don’t seem to have much time for Rudd, just a little more than for Gillard. But you do mention Carr in a favourable manner:

< …Gillard… unlike… Bob Carr, an expert amateur historian… both in her speech and writings, appears pedestrian and devoid of inspiring rhetoric and evidence of deeply held, carefully thought through ideals and beliefs. >

So is Carr their man?

Kevin Donnelly has omitted to add the Howard government’s SES school funding model to the list of polices that the ALP has copied from the Coalition. This was obvious the day the Gonski report was released, and I said so then, but no journalist or commentator that I read would report this fact. But, finally, 13 months after the Gonksi report was released, one did. The drought broke and Paul Kelly reported the glaring defect in the Gonski report:
“Contrary to early expectations, the new model for private school funding is really a rebadged SES (socioeconomic status) model, despite denials. The SES model was devised under John Howard and is beloved by Abbott….”
(http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/pm-prepares-education-election/story-e6frg74x-1226607110872)

This allowed me to reinforce the point:
“CONGRATULATIONS to Paul Kelly for at last reporting what was obvious the day the Gonski report was released 13 months ago - that the new school funding model "is really a rebadged SES (socioeconomic status) model" ("PM prepares education election", 27/3)….”
(http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/letters/gonski-report-defect-would-hurt-systemic-schools/story-fn558imw-1226607960167)

Adding to the bizarre twists of the Gonksi “debate” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14073&page=0), people who signed a letter demanding the end to the SES model years ago (http://www.pgr.org.au/r23.html) have now signed a letter demanding its implementation under Gonski (http://www.sstuwa.org.au/sstuwa/public-education-federal-campaign/sstuwa-federal-funding-campaign-news-a-updates/9190-open-letter-to-prime-minister-premiers-chief-ministers).

If the systemic school authorities have any sense, they will not be conned into accepting the SES model again as they were by the Howard government’s “no losers” guarantee when it was first introduced.

I find it astounding that so many members of the LABOR party are prepared to go down with the Gillard ship in September hence denying their innate instinct for survival.

Julia has shown to the world that she has reached her level of incompetence, in fact, she has far surpassed it. As she dithers her way through the P.M. role she reminds me of a talentless child who has been given the lead role in a school play by a pet teacher.

Those who have carried her and supported her incompetence will have many years to regret their stupidity and lack of judgement. The blood-letting will go on for years.

I'm no fan of Abbott but I will vote for him to ensure that Australia sees the last of Gillard. I had great hopes for her but she has betrayed every one of them!

She would be wise to return to Wales. She is not welcome in Australia!

Kevin, reading your patently partisan narrative, one could be forgiven for believing it was Gillard that leaked and leaked and leaked; and in the process, virtually destroyed a once great party.
A party that was, prior to the leaks, looking at a landslide win and a very different set of policy paradigms!
A party that once attracted both Turnbull and Abbott, as young political activists.
The problem with this piece of patent pernicious propaganda, is that some less able readers might actually believe, it has some or any element of truth or accuracy?
Rhrosty.

In this argument I am with Rhrosty.

Rudd ran a dysfunctional PM's office and although I do not know who was responsible for the 2010 election leaks that was the person who put the party's health last.

The main things that the Rudd Government got right were the apology and the prompt and excellent reaction when the GFC hit but that may have been due to the other three of the gang of four (Gillard, Swan and Tanner). Unfortunately, Lindsay Tanner knew he would probably lose his seat at the 2010 election.

As for the three recent resignations, Crean, Ferguson and Kim Carr, not one of them appears to understand that the real class war is being fought and funded by the neo-liberals and their think tanks against the lower 70-90% of the population. If in doubt look at wealth distribution in those countries well down the scale of social justice such as the USA.

Crean obviously thinks that creating massive superannuation businesses will make a major contribution to solving a future problem. That looming problem will only be treated adequately by building real long life infrastructure now. That requires picking winners in technical fields, not big financial parasites.

Anyone who understands the USA and the Euro situations, and understands economics, knows that neither Quantitative Easing or austerity is a sensible approach, particularly doing a downturn. The USA is bailing out Wall Street and the big banks rather than their victims and Europe is like Australia or the USA would be if they had no strong currency issuing (sovereign) central government.

The author wrote: "Again and again, both in terms of policy decisions and political strategy Julia Gillard proves herself more akin to Machiavelli than Gandhi."

Julia Gillard may be in some ways like Machiavelli, but that is not bad. In "The Prince" he described how rulers have operated to get and keep power. Many of those tactics were unsavoury. Machiavelli described those tactics but did not advocate them. Machiavellian is an adjective which refers to those tactics which Machiavelli wrote about. It does not describe Machiavelli, himself. Machiavelli himself apparently favoured a republican form of government and was an excellent political scientist in describing the actions of a tyrant. If Gandhi had had the foresight of Machiavelli India might have stayed united instead of splitting apart. Gillard's cobbling together a government by attracting independents was like what Machiavelli might have done but not Machiavellian. I think Machiavelli is preferable to Gandhi.